click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130121
20130129
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
in washington. the writing has appeared in "the new york times," "politico," foreign policy and washington monthly among others. they came to us last night from virginia, took a late night train and what i'd like to do is turn it over to you for your thoughts and comments to start off. >> thank you very much. i'm going to start for us today. let me thank you much for hosting us to thank you for coming. it's an honor pleasure and we look forward to nature scene discussion today. i'm going to start with two provocative themes from our new book, "going to tehran: why the united states must come to terms with the islamic republic of iran". the first of these means, and these two get at the heart of our book. the united states is today enhanced and for the past two years a power and relative decline in the middle east. the second core team as the biggest beneficiary of american ongoing decline in the middle east is the islamic republic of iran. if you're not sure you agree with these propositions, i want to ask you to compare the relative position of the united states and the islamic republic o
, do you differ in any areas in foreign policy with respect particularly with respect to former yugoslavia republican of mass done ya, and turkey, and care to comment about people in greece who are encouraging closer relations with israel some because they have fallen out with turkey? but i'd like to get some idea who how you view current foreign policy in greece. >> translator: i could tell you that -- is that a country doesn't have continue newty in the foreign policy. we going to come not to do a 180 and turn everything around, but able to give a multidimensional and active tone to our foreign policy. during my meeting with the u.s. ambassador, earlier this week, he told me what does it mean? what is multiidimensional and active foreign policy mean? greece is a country in europe but it's not like the other european countries. we're not lucky enough to be bordered by sweden. our borders are a hot bed. a hot area in the met mediterranean basin inspect is an area that is historically has been a region where there have been attempts to assert one's claims and make attempts associ
's foreign policy aide related for diplomacy and our presence throughout the world. if you let back -- look back to congress 20, 25 years ago, is essentially made up of people who have the relationship to world war ii and its aftermath in terms of the u.s. global engagement. the marshall plan and the rebuilding of japan in america's prisons. in the relationship also in the lessons and threat posed by the cold war. and those were very defining, major umbrella issues that produced great statesman. henry jackson and others on a bipartisan bill and water's edge, america's presence and engagement around the world. two superpowers, the umbrella that was held over the world stifled the regional and local factions and tensions that erupted after the end of the cold war. that all had a significant impact on the american people and commitment and support for the u.s. to be at bobo -- be globally engaged. it is the possibility of a five alarm fire and everybody's been to try to keep them from getting out of control. with the fall of the wall in the aftermath, there was the defining event and that was
and the further of american foreign policy. all have some questions later on policies and your views, including how you explain to world leaders how you could have been rooting for the boston red sox instead of what the world knows as the new york yankees as a team of the world, but let me say, mr. chairman, it has been a pleasure working with you and looking forward to continuing to work with you on the issues you're a champion of the years. fighting global terrorism, preventing the spread of nuclear biological chemical weapons, fighting for human rights and against hiv aids to a round the world. fighting crime corruption, drug trafficking, and standing up, as you always have, for the interest of foreign service around the world. in your new role, should you be confirmed, and i know you will, your portfolio will be greatly expanded, center stage representing the interest of all this from securing our embassies in protecting our overseas personnel to promoting commerce and enhancing cross cultural ties and keeping american security corporation where possible and isolation where necessary as in
be focused on an unwilling to continue to support? >> well, as i said in my opening, i think foreign policy is increasingly economic policy, and we have an undersecretary for economic affairs, economics, energy etc.. i think that the state department historical use to have a foreign commercial service back in 1979. it slipped away. i think the secretary had the time -- i think that is something we ought to be doing in a very significant way. obviously working with the treasury with agriculture -- atta boy -- ag does and the treasury department does, and i think there is much more that we can do to augment our engagement in the private sector and their desires and needs abroad. i will give you an example. when i was in hong kong and number of years ago i met with our commercial service people. we had three of them. three people in hong kong. and they said they were overwhelmed. they had no ability to be given to mary rfp from china cummins writ with other countries. france was there, germany, england, others were much more aggressive in their promotion of their companies. and that is the wor
are subscribers and readers which we've carried out in collaboration with foreign policy and lots of other conferences and publications around south asian affairs. so anyway, we're all very pleased to have this occasion to bring us together, and the purpose today is to have a very serious discussion about the ideas and subjects that are in the book and that are, obviously, still alive as dilemmas for american foreign policy. so let me introduce peter and welcome him to the podium. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, steve, and thank you for all of you coming today and for c-span for covering this. steve was instrumental in making this whole project happen, so i'm very grateful to him. thank you, also, to oxford university press which published the book and did, i think, a fine job in terms of presenting the material. thank you, also, to my co-editor, katherine, and thanks also to people here at the foundation, brian fishman, patrick doherty, jennifer roland and andrew lev witch who were also involved in making the book possible. as steve indicated, the reason we felt this project was neces
-- and so you've had a lot to say about foreign policy. you've also had a thing or two to say about the republican position on taxes and a number of other issues. so i wonder, is your view that republicans need to get right on foreign policy and can that that is really a core issue that's affecting everything else, or do you see that fundamentally as a garnish on the salad, something maybe we ought to -- a nice to have, not an essential? >> you know, i think we need as a party to have -- i won't try to say his last name because i always butcher it myself -- i think we need john and bill need that wing of the party, but we also need realists that acted and thought and saw the world like we with did when we were in congress in the 1990s, when we controlled congress from '94 on where we believe inside a restrained foreign policy. .. as long as republicans have a coherent foreign policy, i think americans will go along with it. i think our bigger problem from the bush era came from the fact he's a big government republican. he came in with $155 billion surplus. when you left we had a tr
viewpoint whether it be on foreign policy and anti-communist some come economic conservatism, the limited government, constitutionalism or what today is called social conservatism more likely than it would be called traditional conservatism. the issues were a little different and less clear back then there's always been social conservatism. rusher had a very important ally named frank meijer. meijer remains a respected and known at least an older generation of conservatives that there is a society here in washington which i'm going to be a group of leaders that keep this memo alive and they are good to be meeting on monday night and i am going to be speaking to them. he's been described as the intellectual engine of the conservative movement. he too was an ex-communist. but he was a conservative activist. a passionate conservative activist. rusher even told me that he had once been a militant communist viet cong had been a militant republican. quote, they are not all that far apart accepting what they believe. what he meant by that is the have a tremendous attraction and respect for frank
to the conservative viewpoint, whether it be on foreign policy and anti communism, economic conservative as some, constitutionalism or what today is called social conservatism more likely than can -- traditional conservatism. the issues were different and less clear back then but there has always been social conservatism. rusher had an important ally named frank meyer remains sufficiently respected and known among at least an older generation of conservatives that there is a frank meyer society in washington which i am going to be a group of conservative leaders who keep his memory alive. they are going to be meeting monday night and i will be speaking to them. meyer has been described by rusher as the intellectual engine of the conservative movement. he too was an ex-communist as burnham was. but meyer was a conservative activist. a passion that conservative activists. rusher even told me that meyer had once been a militant communist. rusher had been a militant republican, quote, they are not all that far apart except in what they believe. what rusher meant by that was he had it tremendous attr
will judge them a little bit differently. i think the decisions that he has made on foreign policy with respect to the war on terror will be viewed as some point in the future as more courageous and less in that than they are currently. they're less favorable in the size of government not shrinking the government spending. the interests of cutting him, cutting spending, cutting the size of the government the congressman when we talk about this is a guy by the name of jeff who isn't very well known was a advocate of cutting the earmarks and john mccain is a good candidate with wide appeal and he wasn't conservative because he is pretty moderate on a lot of issues like on global warming legislation, immigration, so i think that in some ways -- thye support his immigration policy, so in some ways republicans need to return to the reagan years but they also need to be proactive and advocating policies that have independent appeal. islamic in our short discussion we talk about religion. what do you say to people that think republicans are fundamental christians that are out of touch in
's foreign policy, aid related or diplomacy in our presence throughout the world. you know, if you look back to, say, congress can 20, 25 years ago, it was essentially made up of people who had a relationship to world war ii and its aftermath in terms of u.s. global engagement, the marshall plan and the rebuilding of japan and america's presence. and the relationship also, i mean, and the lessons and the threat posed by the cold war. and those were very defining, major umbrella issues that produced great statesmen, henry jackson and others, on a bipartisan politics at the water's edge, america's presence b and engagement around the world. two superpowers of the um real la that kind of -- umbrella was kind of held over the world and stifled the kind of regional and local factions and tensions that erupted after the end of the cold war. that all had a significant impact on the american people and commitment, i think, and support for the commitment for the u.s. to be a global, globally engaged, the superpower. um, it was the possibility of a five-alarm fire, and everybody's in to try to keep th
tradition that doesn't harm people and the arrogance by which the foreign policy traced to dictate terms and countries like bolivia less than 1% of any excess cocaine in bolivia and set in the united states. and the heavy-handed nature of the policy would think this is some kind of a flood from bolivia the way that we dictate terms in this country. now imagine if the united nations and the u.n. convention were to treat coffee the way with the content they treat coca what would happen if they tell oblivion's chewing coca which they'd been doing for centuries if not thousands of years imagine if they did that to the united states you have to give up this habit now. she was a major that went to elmhurst college, and in 2001 he comes by europe with the administration to secretly them coffee for one day without notice during finals week as a project so all these students get up in the morning and there's no coffee in the bookstore area sold on campus and they have friends dress up in trenchcoats as drug dealers. you want to buy a shot of espresso? $6. and people were actually buying this stuf
states foreign policy tries to dictate terms to places like bolivia, less than 1% of excess cocaine in bolivia with ends up in the united states. and yet the heavyhanded nature of u.s. policy, you would think this was some kind of flood coming from bolivia the way we dictate terms to that country. and so, now, imagine if the united nations and the audience of the u.n. convention were to treat coffee the way, with the contempt they treat coca, right? what would happen if they -- and they've told bolivians and peruvians you have to stop chewing coca which they've been doing for centuries, if not thousands of years. imagine if they did that to the united states, you know, coffee, you have to give up this habit now. what would happen? well, a friend of mine actually did this. he was a performance art major, andrew. he went to amherst college, and in 2001 he conspire with the the school administration and student government to secretly ban coffee or for one day without notice during finals week as a performance art project. so all these students get up in the morning, and there's no coff
a dysfunctional foreign policy, we have a big problem with demographics and the retirement of the baby boom generation as a non-trivial problem, and we have a field of case triple the educational system by any kind of economic stance. we have the potential for really bad times if we do not change direction. this is good news, it isn't too late because the skill exponential and about eight years but we have about that kind of time frame in order to start moving. if we don't move in the next four or five years it becomes almost impossible mathematically to fix a problem without some kind of a social real upheaval that wouldn't be fun i don't think to date i happen to be even with the recent election results i happen to be fairly optimistic, and i know that sounds strange. i do think there are two things. i think for the american sense of life is a protector to the degree that americans fundamentally in some level don't like big government. they don't like big government, and when times seem to be going the wrong direction and get positive surprises like we did in 2010 when the american pushba
a member of the appropriations committee speaks to the council on foreign relations on how foreign policy is affected by the budget and debt. that is at 830 eastern. and janet napolitano will focus on cybersecurity and immigration and terrorism and disaster relief. that will be at 9:30 p.m. on c-span3. on c-span, at 10:00 a.m. eastern, massachusetts senator john kerry testifies before the foreign relations committee. is it against the confirmation process for john kerry and secretary of state. he is scheduled to be introduced by secretary of state hillary clinton. >> this started in the 1940s with sylvia porter. and has been in the 1930s, the hard economic times of the 1930s. we see everything from alcoholics anonymous to napoleon thinking they can get rich and fascism and communism, and that was something that you can feel at the time. there is a cool thing going on at that time. and so we developed personal-finance out of this. sylvia's goal is to educate people so that the great depression will never happen again. but it is of its time. the idea that we can teach people certain skills
currently serves as deputy national security advisor and previously served as a foreign policy specialist in congress. secretary of state hillary clinton was on capitol hill this week testifying before both house and senate committees on the september attack on the consulate in benghazi. this is her appearance before the house foreign relations committee chaired by california congressman ed rice. it's three hours. [background sounds] >> this hearing on the committee on foreign affairs will come to order. welcome, madam secretary. madam secretary, on behalf of the entire committee, let me say how glad we are to see you healthy and how much we appreciate your desire to testify about benghazi before you leave office. let me also say that our appreciation extends to the work that you have performed on behalf of our country. this is our committees opening hearing of this congress. it is my initial hearing as the chairman. examining the first murder of the u.s. ambassador in nearly 35 years the killing of other brave americans is not a work in place to start, but it is necessary. the state depa
in foreign policy. it's inevitable we're going find plays we funded people who are actually against this. as you know, i prefer less foreign involvement. >> another question from the web. the president talked about climate change. it's not something that we've heard a lot about in the debates that you've been discussing over the past hour or so. your thoughts on where it might go in the 113th congress? >> my instinct what you heard in the president's inauguration speech, he was trying to basically throw a bone to every left-wing activist group he could and so start to think about this more from this white house. they received so much pressure from labor and those who want the economy to grow like the keystone pipeline. and companies that want like solyndra. you start to see the gains being played. and this goes back to my earlier discussion. if you actually just read the speech and wrote side notes and says it's for this constituency and make this group money, if i do a keystone pipeline vote over here and allow it to go. i better throw some red meat to the environmentalist activists. i'
of collective action on issues like foreign policy and trade, and when we leave the door from the open to new members. a new settlement subject to the democratic legitimacy and accountability of national parliaments where member states combined in flexible cooperation, respecting national differences and not always trying to eliminate them, and in which we have proved that some powers can, in fact, be returned to member states. in other words, a settlement which would be entirely in keeping with the mission for an updated european union i have described today. more flexible, more adaptable, more open, fit for the challenges of the modern age. now, to those who say, and there are those who say it, that a new settlement can't be negotiated, i would say listen to the views of other parties in other european countries arguing for powers to flow back to european states. and also look to at what we've achieved already. we have ended the obligation for britain to bail out the eurozone members. we have kept britain out of the fiscal compact. we have launched a process which turns an existing justice
that is extremely well. that line. it '02 not only a foreign policy figure but a politician. what is the effective counter to that? one, i think we have to acknowledge we have a lot of nation building to do here at home. and that needs to be the priority. and that reality i think is going effect the kind of resources we are going have available to do the kind of global engagement global diplomacy that we have seen in the past. and i think we're going -- we are severely resource constrainted and politically constrained and we have to prioritize and make the case for whatever expenditure go out relative to military presence and spending more state and diplomacy in foreign aid spending. so that is the reality that we have to deal with, we have to, i believe, we will be forced to have to make hard choices. in that regard. secondly, i would simply say as i say to virtually every interest group that comes in to my office saying you know -- here is the line. we know that resources are tight, we know we have to give it back, but our program is different than everybody else's. and that's universal. and rat
though the government had speakers at the press club and they had a policy of having the foreign dignitaries at the press club and so women who were assigned to cover these people were cooped up in this hot miserable balcony where they couldn't eat and here they could see the man on the floor having a nice lunch also they didn't have enough milk to but that was with the status of the women in those days there was a woman at the "washington post" i knew well who was taken off the prized civil-rights assignment at the post because the people that were involved in this civil rights protest were going to have meetings here at the press club and because women were not allowed in the press club they were complaining about this and said we will find a man for this. that's the way things work to the estimate was your beat the "washington post"? >> i have a variety of beads at the washington post. i covered the suburbs in the city of alexandria and covered the course general sessions that was now the superior court and i covered welfare and i covered education, the d.c. public schools. i
on outgoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our governments reckless fiscal policies over the past five years, our federal debt has increased by three and a half trillion dollars, to $8.6 trillion. would love to have those numbers today. since then we now have a $16.4 trillion debt, nearly doubled in six years. in fact, since this president has become president, 2009, he has added more than, more than four times, more than 4 trillion, more debt in four years, excuse me, than the previous president did in eight. so to the forget, quick question. was the president right? is this a failure of leadership? is there a better direction? >> i certainly think he was right that we ought and to continue to run the store based on borrowing. there's a lot of ways you can pay your debts. and they don't all conclude -- >> but since he made that speech it's gotten worse. he's done nothing to change the trajectory. it's gotten worse. so was the president right? is it a leadership that are? >> i would agree with that, it is. >> congressman, i'm would say that he was right to say what h
, congress and the administration should be implementing policies that encourage job creation, rein in government regulations, replace our convoluted tax code with one that is fair, simple and certain, open foreign markets to american manufactured goods and agricultural products and develop a comprehensive energy policy. we are not immune from the laws of economics that face every nation. the congressional budget office estimates that government spending on health care entitlements, soegts security and -- social security and interest on the national debt will consume 100% of the total revenues generated by the federal government by the year 2025. that means the money that the government spends on national defense, transportation, veterans health care and other government programs will have to be borrowed, driving us even further into debt. c.b.o. issued a report last june which warned that unless we work to reduce our debt, we face the increased probability of a sudden fiscal crisis that would cause investors to lose confidence in the government's ability to manage its budget and th
assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies." he goes on to say -- "over the past five years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. that is trillion with a t. that is money that we have borrowed from the social security trust fund, borrowed from china and japan, borrowed from the american taxpayers. with over -- and over the next five years between now and 2011, the president's budget will increase the debt by almost $3.5 trillion." continuing to quote from senator obama in 2006, "numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. some people may wonder why they matter. here is why. this year, the federal government will spend $220 billion on interest. that is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we'll spend on medicaid and the state children's health insurance program. that is more money than we pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation and veterans' benefits combined. it's more in one year than we're likely to spend to rebuild the devastat
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)